21 January 2020

Scattershots – 21jan20 (updated 27jan20)

George Rebane

RL Crabb is prominent in today’s (21jan20) Unionlambasting AB5, the latest socialist outrage from Sacramento. (more here) This piece of dreadful anti-work legislation has finally caught enough of our liberal artsy-fartsy crowd to also get them squawking – less known, AB5 impacts at least as many of California's high-tech STEM consultants and freelancers. Our cartoonist friend Bob Crabb’s distress (here) puts paid on what most of us have known about his true ideological colors – for shur he ain’t no middle-roader. Regardless of his ire against the state’s Democrats – it’s akin to my ire against the state’s Republicans, but I don’t pretend to be a mid-roader – he cannot countenance the other side, even in the face of AB5. “I also do not agree with those who want to steer clear of partisan politics. This bill is 100% Democrat. It was written by an assemblywoman who curses like a sailor and dismisses us as whiners who are too dense to understand how fortunate we are to have her party looking out for our well-being. It passed on a straight party line vote. It was signed by a governor who just dedicated millions of dollars to enforcing it. California Democrats believe they have little to fear from the riffraff at the bottom tier of workers. We are, after all, musicians, journalists, community theaters, and cartoonists. What are we going to do? Vote for Republicans? Ha ha ha!” As you can see, regardless of the years of collectivist crap flowing from our Democrat legislature, Bob would not change his vote to give us bottom tier riffraff a chance to sell our services as we choose – a few eggs have yet to be cracked and sacrifices have to be made.

California leavin’should be the title of a new musical lament for all those folks heading out of state. But there’s enough of us disgruntled Golden Staters to take and remake the places where we land and put down new stakes. An example is Star, Idaho, a small town near where one of our dear departed California expats and RR readers now lives. Star’s population has more than doubled in the last ten years as couples like JT and Mary Jo Turnipseed (their real name, honest!) left SoCal and moved in to experience small town living at its best. Well, no more. “Now Star is grappling with some of the same problems the Turnipseeds left California to escape. The town’s main drag, where ranchers once drove their cattle, is clogged with traffic during rush-hour commutes. Sprawling subdivisions have sprouted up around farmland, as have new chain stores. The median home price has more than doubled to nearly $400,000 since 2010.” (more here) The most amazing thing to me is still the utter blindness of our states overwhelming population of leftwing loonies who deny that any of this exodus is going on. It mirrors exactly their grossly distorted perception of the realworld which is their daily drink from the lamestream. For them, another sip of that Kool-Aid, and all’s right with the world.

[22jan20 update] Today at lunch with a longtime friend of, shall we say, a different socio-political persuasion, we discussed the “overwhelming” evidence which the Dems proclaimed to the nation in support of their case to convict President Trump of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’, and get him out of 1600 Pennsylvania before he trounces them at the polls this November. My friend strongly argued the prosecution’s call for additional witnesses and documents, with which to catalyze the evidence developed during the weeks of House impeachment hearings that, it now appears, did not overwhelm anyone and will not overwhelm anyone in the Senate chamber. The Dems’ evidence is essentially limp and ludicrous on arrival, and needs at least another fishing expedition launched to prop it up and give it some, any, substance before the president is summarily acquitted. But calling for witnesses is really a bluff by the Dems on which Majority Leader McConnell may well call Team Nancy and lead to a sanitary problem in multiple shorts. My prognosis is that the Dems will do nothing which results in any Biden taking the witness stand, let alone requiring Mr Lead Prosecutor Adam Schiff to also raise his hand and swear to tell the truth for a change.

[23jan20 update] The unmitigated hatred of Trump by our Left is on full display in ‘Time for Trump to go’ by local leftwinger Nancy Eubanks in the 23jan20 Union. There the newspaper gives the lady the entire prime-spot left panel to lambaste the president. And she does not hold back, spewing unsupported allegation after allegation and obvious lie after lie, all the while calling Trump the nation’s consummate liar whose lies average “over 10 times every day according to several nonpartisan fact checkers.” Has anyone ever asked how many lies about Trump come out daily from Team Nancy, the multitude of lamestream news outlets, the countless campuses across the country, the Dems’ impeachment brigade (Schiff’s speech yesterday on the Senate floor was a doozy - more here), and the entertainment media’s daily dose of films and TV programs??

[24jan20 update] Irrefutable proof that stupid is contagious. The Dems are proposing to make California’s horrendously stupid AB5 the law of the land. This proposal has now been endorsed by their top presidential candidates Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Pete Buttigieg. Talk about a slate of ignorant?cynical anti-Americans wanting to become chief executive – they are all extreme leftwingers. Today this law is causing chaos in the state’s employment markets, and is even being opposed by liberals whose jobs are in peril or already history. In desperation the Sacramento stupidos are trying to do a workaround with a growing pile of special interest carve-outs before they accelerate California’s calamitous worker exodus, indigent immigrations, shrinking tax base, economic contraction, and most importantly, voter defections. (more here and here) Perhaps the passage of such destructive legislation, that is finally a shot into our socialists’ shorts, will help Republicans to launch a resurgence of sanity in California.

[27jan20 update] That Democrats are now the anti-American party is confirmed by three things which uniquely identify them – 1) ALL of them are willing to risk the US economy through massive tax increases to buy votes needed to stay in power through directed wealth redistribution – moderate Democrats are a myth, 2) NONE of them have any social policies save to remove President Trump from office before the November election (H/T to reader who posted the latest VDH piece on the topic), 3) ALL are globalists first, prepared and pursuing means to reduce US sovereignty and hegemony in favor of submitting to globalist organizations in economics, trade, governance, and world order.

Comments

Gerrymandering by algorithm has reached to be a fine art supported by some very sophisticated math. Both sides practice it whenever given a chance; only courts have been able to check some of its more egregious applications. California is again a posterchild of successful gerrymandering. With its current breakdown of "the 19,696,371 California voters registered for the November 6, 2018, general election: 43.5% were Democrats. 24.0% were Republicans. 5.0% were affiliated with other political parties." With successful Dem gerrymandering they were able to get 46 (or 86.8%) of the 53 House seats, double their party affiliation share.

Without gerrymandering, you aren't likely to get any kind of proportional (outside of geography) representation.

No doubt there are papers galore on other mechanisms of what is basically a bidding strategy to appoint gubmint officials. Its hard to avoid the need for attaching a seat to a place given the way money flows.

It is funny how Team Red is blamed for 'abusing' the districting process. It's the kind of fib that becomes true via retelling.

He makes a good point that 43% of the voters get 86% of the seats. Even an election with a highly unpopular (R) candidate we saw 63% of the votes going to Hillary for those 86% of seats. Why would California receive an award? Hell if I know. It's probably from a MSM source or an Ivy League school.

It's a problem with democracy generally. A majority can boss around a minority, regardless of 'fairness' (whatever that is). That's why you need those silly Constitutions and Bills of Rights and so on.

The primary problem is that as government metastasizes, not just in primary effect via taxes/spending but in secondary via regulations, it becomes more important. A thing that is basically the biggest corporation of all, essentially a monopoly, becomes more and more important to your daily life. If it sucks, your life sucks. Better to minimize it's impact.

,,,Kinda sad that you won't read links that people post...you prefer your alternative facts I guess...

Here is a little blurb...

'''As members of the inaugural California Citizens Redistricting Commission, we have been invited to share our experiences at conferences and town halls with a wide variety of audiences seeking to implement independent redistricting and eliminate partisan gerrymandering in their states. These include good government groups and community-based organizations, fair-minded legislators, business and civic leaders, academics, engaged citizens, and the media.

Innovations in American Government AwardsAll Commissioners who participate in travel to other states volunteer their time. We are the proud recipients of an Innovations in American Government Award from the Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, which supports travel for the Commissioner Speaker Corps at no expense to California taxpayers. Host organizations may also provide funding and local transportation.'''

odlaW 214pm - you have no comments in "TypePad detention", and none have been placed there by me. Repost if you still have the links. BTW, your comment again confirms that you don't know jack shit about me.

comma-man, one of the main reasons for gerrymandering is for representation. There simply wouldn't be black congressmen in a lot of cases otherwise. A lot of reasons exist for the practice beyond simply having a majority nailing down it's dominance, which happens on both sides of the aisle. Once again, it's not a Team Red specialty regardless of what CNN or Vanity Fair might say.

Generally, this problem with democracy is a darned good reason for two things, founding documents laying down rights, regardless whether you think people should own guns or say anything they like, and for minimization of the scope/size of government. Government allows a simple majority to use the force of the state to do absolutely anything they want to a minority.

"Former national security adviser John Bolton reportedly wrote in an outline for a book that President Donald Trump tied the withheld Ukraine aid to the country’s announcement that it would investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

Drafts of the book outline obtained by The New York Times describe Trump telling Bolton in August that he wanted to continue freezing nearly $400 million in congressionally approved military assistance to Ukraine until officials there agreed to help investigate his political rival. "

A top aide to former national security adviser John Bolton is disputing part of a Sunday report in The New York Times, which claimed Bolton had shared a manuscript of his forthcoming book with "close associates" -- and that the manuscript included a bombshell claim that Trump explicitly linked a hold on Ukraine aid to an investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden.

Oh, let the Punch drink his punch and get his spirits soaring. I love it when he floats like a butterfly then stings himself. It’s the only thing keeping him going besides running cable. Don’t let the cat out of the bag. Sooner or later the publisher will release that one line in the whole book that gets his juices flowing and he won’t be able to contain himself. It will be an irresistible teaser and the book peddler will be raking in the dough.

Then, true to form, the context will be released, just like those two NYT reporters that wrote the book on Kavanaugh and got the them all fired up and started crying out for Kavanaugh to be impeached again. Then, sheepishly, they admitted to “misworded” juicy nuggets. :)

It’s all Kavanaugh now. Speaking of fiction and sorta kinda on topic, the author of Handmaiden’s Tale speaks out. We have had Pulp Fiction, Paperback Fiction, and now the unhinged Blue Mob as turned themselves into Cult Fiction.

BillT: "I love it when he floats like a butterfly then stings himself. "

The obvious analogy, and no doubt already used, is Charlie Brown and his football.

THIS TIME FER SURE!!!

Emerianism is a tough ol' row to hoe. Satan is never vanquished, the unbelievers laugh at you, they ran out of Peet's at the radio station. Life is hard.

One thing that confuses me about the Ukraine is that is Trump not allowed to push for investigating Team Blue misdeeds in foreign countries from here on? Is there some time-out before elections? Can Democrats simply pick up brown envelopes when a (R) is in the Oval Office? Enquiring minds want to know.

One sad thing here is the increasing acceptance of anti-Christian philosophies (a variant of Emerianism I would suppose), especially of the remaining Christians in the traditional US, which tend to Pentecostals.

At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, it smells a lot like anti-semitism. You target a group you don't like, accuse them of a list of sins, some with a bit of truth some not, and then flesh out your movement by accusing them of the worst things you can imagine. The Southern Baptists are too well armed to be the object of a pogrom, but the underlying tension feels the same.

The cynic in me sez that a big part of the misogynist charges against Trump are that his wife is better looking than 99.9% of American women (and 100% of American transsexual males) who weigh over 12 stone on average, plus she's a furriner to boot. Maybe not, but it's a theory that niggles at the back of my brain.

Scenes:
“One thing that confuses me about the Ukraine is that is Trump not allowed to push for investigating Team Blue misdeeds in foreign countries from here on? “

Bingo! That’s is exactamundo. Trump is not allowed to go there, ever., ever, never, no way, no how.

It is just the Dems doing their Alinsky playbook to perfection. Hire foreigners to dig up manufactured dirt on a political opponent to affect an US election in 2016, then blame Trump for what they did and call the election illegitimate. Can you say Russia, Russia, Russia? It was Trump colluding with foreigners!

Have a DNC operative in the Ukrainian Embassy to coordinate with the Ukrainians to dig up dirt on Trump (their political opponent) and then blame Trump for doing what they did.

Twist arms and extort/blackmail a foreign government for Quid Pro Quo, then blame Trump for Quid Pro Quo and bribery.

So, whatever they are doing, they will blame Trump for all their dirty evil deeds every single time. In a way, it is a telltale sign what they have been up to. So, no going ‘there’ for Trump means going where they have been and left their stank that stunk up the place. Forbidden for Trump to investigate corruption by Democrats. Got it? Good.

Now, it’s Trump trying to destroy the Constitution, a threat to our Democracy, and trying to rig/interfere with an election. Just blame Trump for their dastardly deeds. I love the spin that the Senate is obstructing justice. Just what they did in the House, lol.
———-
Best comment of the day on this great site as highlighted by Gregory @1:20 pm:

",,,asking a foreign nation to make false allegations"—Odlap

This never happened, outside of Schiff's "parody". -Gregory

Se, what ever they are doing or have done, they will accuse others for their very actions.
Saul Alinsky would be most proud and not rolling over in his grave.

Hey, didn’t Hillary write her college thesis on Alinsky and did not Michelle and Barry worship his writings...as well as their buddy Bill Ayers?

So, Scenes, I did not fully answer your question, but it don’t matter what Trump does or did not do.. They will blame Trump anyway, even if he didn’t do it.

It is interesting that the Dems accused Kavanaugh for running gang rape houses in college. Stand at the door to the bedroom and collect the mula. Makes me wonder which Dems gave young maidens beer and quaaludes in plastic party cups and pulled a train on the victims, Don’t blame me, Kavanaugh done did it!, lol.

It is understandable that the pony tail of ignorance is having a hard time, his stormy doll is all worn out and his hero stole all of his clients money. Gee that sounds like a local shark with multiple disbarments. I loved the compellation of the socialist dem media talking up Avenatti as a presidential candidate in 2018.

That says so much more about them that disqualifies their opinions for ever. Goebbels is so proud of them and all the fakenewsmen. LOL!!!

The Dems quiver is empty and it never had anything in it to begin with.

The Senate is obstructing Justice!!

Doug Collins: House Democrats’ Attacks On Senators Show They Have Nothing On Trump

“If you’re a lawyer and you’re going to present the case to the ‘jury,’ the first thing you don’t do is go insult them and actually make a case in which they are turned off by what you’re saying,” Collins said. “But it is not a shock, because here’s what happened with the House managers. The reason they did it, number one, is the president is not guilty. He did nothing wrong. The facts and the truth are on the president’s side, and the House managers know that.”

“Number two, we knew it was a political impeachment, because when they actually looked at it from the perspective of what do they want to do, they didn’t want to go to court, they didn’t want to take the witnesses, they didn’t want to do the due diligence that they should have done in the House. So it was a political impeachment,” Collins continued. “So, what are you left with? Well, I guess we’re left with it. Let’s see if we can shame the Senate into doing our job for us.”

“But I think it backfired on them, especially when Chairman Nadler said that, if you don’t agree with me, then you’re – then you’re basically – you’re corrupt, that you’re hiding something,” Collins continued. “That just should show the American people in a clear form that the House managers have nothing on this president, except smear, innuendo, and an election in 2020 in mind.”

“Critics Hammer Bolton After Book Pre-Order Goes Live Following Leaked Manuscript Published By NYT”

Liberal political commentator Dave Rubin responded by writing, “I’m a simple man so maybe I’m not understanding. It seems Bolton is agreeing that Trump wanted to investigate corruption in Ukraine otherwise we’d withhold aid. So are we supposed to give aid to corrupt countries now? Is that now a good thing?”

Fox News political analyst Brit Hume wrote: “This came along right about on schedule.”

Mollie Hemingway wrote: “This is obviously book promo coordinated with compliant media, yes. But an additional word of skepticism: these *particular* folks have a pattern of overpromising and underachieving with their ‘bombshell’ anti-Trump book roll outs.”

(Sean) Davis added, “John Bolton is running the exact same revenge playbook against Trump that James Comey used. He’s even using the same agent and leaking to the same reporters. All because he’s mad Trump fired him for leaking and trying to start new wars. It’s so boring and predictable.”

Go Buck, go!!

Political commentator Buck Sexton wrote: “Given the obvious timing of this, wondering if they will let Michael Avenatti out of prison to help Julie Swetnick claim she was on the phone call with Trump too, so the media can breathlessly print her insane and fact free allegations in a last desperate act to rig the trial.”

“House Democrats seem not to understand that Republicans feel about Adam Schiff the way they feel about Donald Trump, i.e. that he is such a disreputable character that anything he says is automatically tainted.” —Brit Hume

The BIG Lie: “CBS News reported … that a Trump confidant said that key senators were warned, ‘Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.’” —Rep. Adam Schiff (“I thought he was doing fine … until he got to the ‘head on a pike.’ That’s where he lost me.” —Sen. Lisa Murkowski | “Not only have I never heard the ‘head on the pike’ line but also I know of no Republican senator who has been threatened in any way by anyone in the administration.” —Sen. Susan Collins)

If you are not afraid to open this link it explains much of what you probably want to know...

‘’’Public input
Commission proceedings are subject to the state Open Meetings Act; commission records, redistricting data, and computer software will be available to the public. Both the commission and the legislature must issue public reports after drawing the plans for state legislative or congressional districts, explaining their decisions. [Cal. Const. art. XXI, § 2(h); Cal. Gov't Code § 8253]

The commission held extensive hearings in nine different regions throughout the state. Transcripts of past hearings and meetings are here; links for streaming video of live hearings and archived videos of past hearings are here.

The commission invited public input, at these hearings and beyond, with more than 2700 witnesses giving testimony. Materials explaining the mechanism for input are here. The nearly 20,000 comments submitted by the public are archived here.

The Redistricting Group at Berkeley Law School opened six technical assistance sites around the state to assist the public in preparing submissions. Also, Advancement Project created an online application allowing the public to get information about areas of the state, annotate their own communities, or draw full district plans.

On June 10, 2011, the commission released draft maps for public comment. The commission initially planned to release a second series of drafts on July 14, but then reversed course. Instead of that release, it has released preliminary "visualizations" (here and here) of what drafts might look like. The commission released final draft maps on July 29.

California must also, like all states, abide by section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Because four California counties (Kings, Merced, Monterey, and Yuba) are considered "covered jurisdictions" under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, California has an obligation to submit redistricting plans to the Department of Justice or to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, to ensure that the plans do not discriminate against minority communities in those counties.

The California constitution further requires that districts be contiguous. To the extent possible, they must also preserve the geographic integrity of cities, counties, neighborhoods, and communities of interest. To the extent practicable, and where so doing does not violate higher-priority constraints, districts must also encourage compactness, defined by lines that do not bypass nearby population in favor of more distant population. Finally, where practicable, and where not in conflict with the criteria above, state Senate and Assembly districts must be nested within each other. [Cal. Const. art. XXI, § 2(d)]

In drawing maps, the commission may not consider candidate residences, and districts may not be drawn to favor or discriminate against a candidate or party. [Cal. Const. art. XXI, § 2(e)]’’’

Odlaw -- you are wasting your time.. the ruminators and trumplicans don't care about being fair. On an equal playing field, without gerrymandering and voter suppression, the minority party republicans, whose policies are dictated by the spoiled progeny of the robber barons and their phony think tanks, can't win an election unless they buy it, which is what they do (citizens united). Why is CA almost totally democratic?... because there is no gerrymandering. Gaming the system is all the pubbers have.

odlaW 1036am - I did indeed. What does that say about the effectiveness of such commissions? Apparently you see nothing wrong with setting district boundaries that disenfranchise such a huge share of California voters, while doubling representation for voters of one party affiliation. Add to that super-majorities in the legislature, and we have governance by banana republic standards. Result - no one can nor wants to find any middle ground, or a road back to a multi-party governance. How does this end?

odlaW 1100am - The current state of representation is existential and speaks for itself. I don't have to follow the causal beam backwards to know that there is dysfunction at work. There is never a reason to keep unchanged methods and processes that produce bad results.

It's interesting that you (and all your other imaginary playmates…of course……can't leave them out!) are usually little more than a feces throwing Howler Monkey and now you think suddenly anyone is interested in your crack analysis of voter issues!

Wuh? lol. I didn't post anything there. We must have hit a nerve to get so much cuttin' 'n pastin'. Hopefully you have your own thoughts now and again.

The proof is in the pudding of course in terms of districting. Republicans are grossly underrepresented in the California legislature given their numbers. End of story. I expect that you'd be happy if every district in California was 50% + 1 (D) voters and the legislature was 100% Democrat.

Truth is, as I said before, I haven't run into a good way to apportion these numbers. A district that is geographically contiguous will likely have some sin in it's creation. It's certainly possible to construct a mechanical, yet biased algorithm. Maybe the entire system of representation is flawed.

Should ethnic minorities have carved out districts? Republicans? Left-handed people? Is California fair? (of course not, the entire system is set up to extract cash from some and hand it out to others...like other governments, just bigger).

Maybe it would help if the government wasn't such a central towering figure in our lives. Good luck there.

fish 1007am - Very nice haiku. A small nit to make it a formal 5-7-5, insert the article 'a' into the second line to read 'Old man conjures a new friend'. BTW, is this cultural appropriation from Japan? We have to watch ourselves these days ;-)

odlaW 1215pm - Don't pay no mind, you're doing great with your references. Even though I don't agree with the course of your argument, I do appreciate how you provide civil support for your case. Onward!

"Let me get this straight...you don’t want to open links because they are ‘’’opinions’’’"

Honestly, I lost track of the thread on this a while back, it's essentially your topic you are trying to drag people into. I'm fine with reading a factual link, don't need a page of cuttin' 'n pastin'...it's just not a topic I'm particularly interested in.

I can see the underlying concept. Republicans are the masters of unfair (whatever that is) gerrymandering because they are bastards and California does a great job of it because it isn't run by Republicans. And so it goes.

The interesting thing would be to invent your own concept of governance, or at least a good methodology for picking a legislature. I'm dissatisfied with all I've run into.

"Black representation??? WTF...it is about political representation not affirmative action, lol!!!"

Why not have AA in representation? The alternative is the 50%+1 problem if the population is anywhere near evenly distributed. God didn't tell Moses that political power is distributed only on geography. A state, after all, is different than a nation....and Moses would know about that.

A small nit to make it a formal 5-7-5, insert the article 'a' into the second line to read 'Old man conjures a new friend'. BTW, is this cultural appropriation from Japan? We have to watch ourselves these days ;-)

'''Republicans are the masters of unfair (whatever that is) gerrymandering because they are bastards and California does a great job of it because it isn't run by Republicans.'''

Not at all. I am trying to supply what I believe to be factual info in an attempt dispel some of the suspicions you all have about the process...
In my opinion I think Cali is trying to to it the right way...

Ok, I will drop the redistricting thing by popular demand...but...one more cut and paste if you please....

In 2011, we were asked again to provide a web-based tool – ReDrawCA.org – in conjunction with the newly-established California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission). The Commission brought district line-drawing out of traditional smoky back rooms of political power and into the realm of public participation. We partnered with community organizations up and down California to ensure that low-income communities and people of color actively participated in the redistricting process. Local residents and organizations used the data and mapping tools on ReDrawCA.org to experiment with how Congressional, legislative, county supervisors, city councils, and school boards districts could best reflect the people they serve. They could then print the maps and bring them to Commission meetings as part of the public proceedings. The result was a resounding success. The statewide website hosted nearly 6,000 visitors who used the site nearly 10,000 times. Advancement Project also provided web tools and technical assistance to five locations throughout California. The Commission received public input based on data and from a wide variety of Californians. Residents and community organizations were able to participate in an effective manner. And many of the ways in which political power had been held for decades were overturned, with the result that communities of color have elected representatives that better reflect their values, concerns, and backgrounds.

It occurs to me that you could understand more about the efficacy of a district by mapping it against political contributions at the state level. A well designed boundary might well have a stronger correlation between the two variables than a poor one.

I too will make a last remark about gerrymandering and redistricting. No one is saying that the district boundaries do not reflect the will of California's majority; and thereby hangs the tragic Götterdämmerung of democracies - given a weak and faulty structure of incorporating public wants, the majority always has and will take the means to transform themselves into tyrannies. Our Founders knew that.

Been waiting for an opening in the thread to post this anecdotal story.

Re: California Leaving on such a winter’s day.

I am saddened greatly for a few days now about losing another family to another state. Probably Idaho. Every once in a while, a CA emigrate and their story hits hard.

The family in question are the greatest ‘neighbors’ one should wish to have. Young couple, maybe 35-40 years old. The couple is in the process of adopting two children. Good folks, friendly, slow to anger, very positive, and rather successful as evidenced by all the equipment and big steel buildings they erected for their business. Very moral as well.

They just got back from house hunting out of state, which was a shock to moi. The reason? Despite their material success, the husband explained to me that he just cannot make a living in CA any longer. It’s the regulations, pure and simple. Not because of Libs or ideology, just because of excess and intrusive CA regs. No choice, has to move on. They bought their dream home and acreage herein the foothills and loved it. Now, CA has lost another productive member of the middle class. Sad story. These are the kind of people we want to attract, that makes our State special.
——————————
Heard from my buddy who moved to Northern Nevada in the sticks. He built his “cabin in the mountains” here 30 years ago. His life, his CA dreaming.
He wanted to do an add on and changes to his new abode in Nevada. It took him ONE DAY to get a permit. He could not believe it. So excited he called. I asked him if he had adjusted to the different geography and life and he answered he had, quite well, thank you. He thought he would miss his cabin in the mountains (foothills) but he said no way would he ever go back. It’s the lack of regulations. A feeling of freedom
He, like others I have stayed in contact with, all describe the same thing: As they look at CA in the rear view mirror (literally), they can feel this invisible weight being lifted from their shoulders. One can blame regs or housing costs or turning too blue, or the price of tea in China... but the feeling of the weight on the shoulders being lifted needs no reason or can be articulated. It says it all.
The end.

** Nets All But Ignore Second Day of Trump Defense, Gush for Bolton Book. (BillT sez: Yeah, I noticed that all day long. It’s as if the WH defense team could not make the hot sizzling press if they tried)

** CNN Goes on WARPATH Against ‘Insulting’ Trump Legal Team from a ‘Different Planet’

Digging through obscure archives, I found an interesting foreign article about the ‘former’ spy chief in the Kremlin named as a source related to the Steele Dossier. He was relating his story and said his first assignment was a journalist stationed in India (before serving as the USSR ambassador to India).
“A journalist?” the surprised interviewer asked the top disinformation chief.
“Yes” replied the old Russian. “All journalists in India are spies.”

We seem to have had the same thing going on here during the Russian Hoax. Just saying.

“There is not a scintilla of evidence that the Biden’s relationship to Ukraine was inappropriate, there is a tsunami of evidence.”.... Hunter used the Ukraine as a ATM machine....need to investigate whether a DNC staffer tried to influence the 2016 election.....and more.

You want witnesses? I give you a boatload of witnesses! You will get witnesses out the Wazoo.

I tried to warn the Dems. I truly did. I asked if they really wanted to go there. I asked it they really really wanted to open up the Ukrainian can of worms. I asked (being in the know), if they wanted to kick that hornets nest. Apparently, the answer was ‘Yes!’

,,, Former White House chief of staff John Kelly says he believes John Bolton's allegation that President Donald Trump told the former national security adviser that US security aid to Ukraine was conditioned on an investigation of the President's political rivals, adding that Bolton should be heard from.

Trump attorney Jay Sekulow argued that the revelations from Bolton’s manuscript would not be admissible during a typical trial, dismissing their importance to the impeachment proceedings,,,

,,,Ok, Jay,,,but this is not a typical trial...

Lindsey Graham said he agrees with Oklahoma GOP Sen. JAMES LANKFORD’S idea that senators should be able to read JOHN BOLTON’S new book in a secure facility.

HERE’S THE WEAKNESS IN THAT PLAN: This isn’t a book club. It’s a trial to remove the president of the United States.

,,,I guess that means we are not in a big rush to end the not-a-trial...

Not one of his best articles, but I always learn something for Pat’s columns from the historical perspective.

Impeachment: The Left’s Ultimate Weapon

“To save “our democracy,” to which they pay tireless tribute, the impeachers want to ensure that the people, in a supposedly free election in 2020, are not allowed to make the same mistake they
made in 2016.”

Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on defenseless cities and sent 2 million POWs back to the tender mercies of Stalin in Operation Keelhaul after World War II.

JFK greenlighted the overthrow of an ally, President Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam, in a coup that ended in the murder of Diem.

LBJ ordered the wiretapping of Martin Luther King, and his White House shared the fruits of that FBI surveillance with a friendly press.

No one was impeached.

Why? Because Truman, JFK and LBJ were establishment favorites.

For Trump, a phone call with a Ukrainian president saying, “Send us your Biden file and we will have a meeting,” is a political capital crime justifying democracy’s version of a death penalty.“

What am I missing on the Bolton expose? We have a he said/she said, and now others are coming forward with their beliefs, suppositions, presumptions, ... of what Bolton claims he heard Trump say. Of course, to a progressive all this is more solid evidence of the kind that they already had an "overwhelming" amount, but to many other more sober souls ...

Worst case scenario: Trump got on the phone and said to the King of the Ukraine, Dammit! Investigate Biden using political influence to keep his grifting boy out of trouble or I'll hold off on some payment or the other.

A good reason to impeach? Of course not. It'll always degenerate into a perjury trap in any case. Running a coup is a tricky thing, although you do have to wonder how the country is actually benefiting from all this.

comma-man: "That Democrats are now the anti-American party..."

'Now' is as good a word as any, although it seems to have ramped up during the Obama regime. Not so much before that. My preferred phrase is 'enemies of Western Civilization' since the craziness appears to be transnational.

what Bolton is attributed as saying is consistent to what many others have already concluded. Do you think the Bolton claim is fake news? Do you think he is lying? Seems to me pretty clear that Trump is lying in this matter which makes me ask why would he lie if he believes he did nothing wrong.

Sorry the questions are difficult for you scenes. Pretty simple to me
Do you think this is fake news-yes or no.
Do you think Bolton is lying yes or no.
Why would Trump lie if he thinks he did nothing wrong-short sentence would do.

The po' ol fakenewsman needs to direct his litany of questions to botox Nancy, schiff for brains and jerry the nads about their failure to issue a sepbonea! They are the prosecutors, memba that don't you? HAHA!!

I think Paul Emery has a logic problem. Trump cannot be impeached on articles that are not in the Constitution. This will be tossed. Bolton will not testify because of Executive privilege. And since his manuscript was vetted by people in the White House and Intellingence, nothing was found. But since PE has TDS nothing short of execution of a Rpublican is acceptable.

The NYT's blind reports on Bolton's book are fake news. So are third parties stating they "believe" what Bolton might have said in his book. No one who has read the book is talking yet. And your 514pm question - "Why would Trump lie if he thinks he did nothing wrong-short sentence would do.(?)" - is a supremely simplistic red herring. What is your evidence that Trump lied? Yet you take that as God's given truth. Is that your best debate format?

Let’s stop right there. The House sent over Articles of Impeachment that are half-ass, incomplete, and do not claim anything close to the level of treason, bribery, and other high crimes. Notice the Constitution says Bribery, Treason, AND other high crimes and misdemeanors. Notice the wording says AND other high crimes, not Treason, Bribery OR other high crimes and misdemeanors. Says and, not or. Show me the high crimes. Show me an impeachable offense.

Why was/is the prosecution NOT ready to go to trial or have a case they can successfully prosecute? They have already made their case. No ‘there’ there. Send it back or kill it. When the prosecution has a good case, send it back to the Senate.

Why? Why? Why o Why? Why did the House send over a weak laughable case? What, did the prosecutors send over Articles of Impeachment and now their excuse is the dog ate their homework or their crayons broke in half?

As far as your new Bolton Golden Shower complete with a Pearl Necklace and Hot Lunch to fingerpaint with, I would not put all my hopes in Bolton’s manuscript. I would not put much faith in a rough draft sent over to his publisher to be edited, but that is just me.

I know, I know. The Dems DID NOT want to subpoena Bolton. It’s sat for months in the House and an expedited case to the courts on Separation of Powers/Executive Priveledge would have been resolved by now.
But, noooooo. The Dems want Bolton just to waltz right in and testify. Just waltz right in and not go through the normal Constitutional protections or picking up a 🖊 filing one little subpoena.

The Dems are always seeking the easier softer way. The lazy man’s “The Idiot’s Guide to the Universe.”

So, stop right there and tell me why the incomplete work in the House had to finished by Christmas. Why did Schiffilis and the Botox Queen and AOC and Nadler put a deadline on such a grave serious manner? It’s a very very high bar.

Impeach Trump for obstruction of Punchy’s demands.

BTW, Trump asks why fund NPR. Radio Stations are cheap and a dime a dozen. Why should the taxpayers give a radio station one dime. It’s not like a real media outlet. Impeach him!

You are clinging to some kind of hope that the verbage attributed to Bolton is not real. I am assuming it is. Is that a fair assessment of the differences we find ourselves in with this matter?

By the way here's a quote from John Kelly, former chief of staff to Trump on the veracity of Bolton in this matter:

"Former White House chief of staff John Kelly on Monday evening said that if media accounts of former national security adviser John Bolton’s forthcoming book are accurate, then he trusts the explosive claims made by his former colleague.

“If John Bolton says that in the book, I believe John Bolton,” Kelly told a crowd in Sarasota, Fla., speaking as part of the Ringling College Library Association Town Hall lecture series. "

Paule: "Sorry the questions are difficult for you scenes. Pretty simple to me.”

Paule want a cracker? Ok, here is a bone: Trump has no friends. The R’s will turn on Trump and he will have to resign within 60 days. Happy now? Opps, Trump resigning within 60 days was penned by a simple man in late January, 2017. And Michael Cohen will deliver the goods and turn on Trump and he will get busted for campaign finance laws!
And Michael ‘the creepy banjo boy’ Avenatti will bring Trump down. And Trump demanded Ukraine to make up dirt on former VP Joe Biden (in charge of Ukraine corruption at the time, roflmao) or else Ukraine will not get military aide and people are dying because of Trump. Opps, strike that. Trump demanded Ukraine manufacture dirt on Hunter or no meeting in the WH.

And let’s not forget the antiquated Emoluments Clause designed to prevent corrupting foreign influences and that Müller did not exonerate Trump, but did not have a prosecutable case, and Obama caged children in concentration camps at the border, and the Russians did influence the outcome of the election (the reason HRC lost) and Trump is a illegitimate POTUS....and he still has no friends and Bolton will flip and say he disagrees with Trump’s foreign policy, and I can’t afford my suppositories and it’s all Trump’s fault and the final straw is he likes breasts!! Too much, just impeach the Orange Man Bad. He is crazy!

The dems dump on the deplorables at their own expense then you have the winning minority numbers -

Working-class Americans who have been betrayed by globalization of the United States’ economy are turning to President Trump’s economic nationalist Republican Party for support.

A report by the New York Times details the shift among U.S. voters. Trump’s GOP is increasingly made up of the working and lower-middle-class devastated by the free trade policies of 30 years, while Democrats represent affluent suburbia and major cities that have bounced back since the Great Recession.

Re ToddJ 634pm - Donald Trump has already been impeached (which is an indictment by the House for removal of a president who is to be tried by the Senate). If the Senate convicts an impeached president, then the Constitution calls for his removal from office. Claiming now that Trump “can’t be impeached” is a moot point and false.

“Fair enough George
You are clinging to some kind of hope that the verbage attributed to Bolton is not real. I am assuming it is. Is that a fair assessment of the differences we find ourselves in with this matter?”

I have no need to bash Bolton. The quickness (faster than knee jerk reaction) to assign validity to a NYT report baffles me. What we have at this moment in time is that a NYT reporter “heard” that Bolton’s rough draft says Trump wanted Ukrainian aid withheld. So, we have no hard evidence, no reporting on what the reporter read or see. with her/his eyes, no eye witness, no nothing. Just the game of telephone. In fact, to date all the 17 witnesses the Dems called to testify in the House could not verify the story of Quid pro Quo, even the single witness to the call. Just their opinions, not one eye witness, save the one who did hear and he heard no Quid Pro Quo.

That is exactly what Kavanaugh was all about. Getting ready to take a vote, but Hold Your Horses, we have reports of a sexual attempted assault Kavanaugh did in high school. A report Di-Fi held onto for months and dropped it on the table as it looked like Kavanaugh would be confirmed.Hold Yer Horses again, we have reports of a pattern of gang rapes at parties and the witness was in college yet managed to come home and hang out with high school boys.
Everyone the star accuser named to verify her story (some life long girl friends could not verify the story, some saying they have never been at any party with Brett K there or anywhere or others saying they cannot verify the accuser ever being there in the first place...or tenth place.

And the mantra was “I believe her.”

I would submit to the record that it is Paul who is actually clinging to some kind of hope, if not boldly going out on the limb to say it is darn near a
You are clinging to some kind of hope that the verbage attributed to Bolton is not real. I am assuming it is fact. To support such an argument from mere hearsay as factually true, a character reference is given (John Kelley.). Like I said, I have no reason to bash Bolton and nobody here has read his published book. Neither did the NYT reporter.

“You are clinging to some kind of hope that the verbage attributed to Bolton is not real. I am assuming it is”

Benefit of the doubt goes to hearsay from the NYT. Ok. It could be true, it could be false. I assume.....benefit of doubt goes to Steele Dossier. Ok.
———————-
To be continued...

I do not have to apologize nor feel the need to be skeptical of the latest 11 hour “bombshell”. My skepticism is well founded based on the last 3 years plus.

The WH finally got the chance to present their case last Saturday. They basically destroyed the argument and ‘evidence’ submitted to the Senate in 2 and a half hours. Did not look good for Schiff or the Dems. Then the weekend. Day two approached and the vote was anticipated by week’s end.
Then, suddenly out of the blue, comes another Hail Mary bombshell with zero direct quotes from Bolton’s book. Zero. Not one direct quote, but the hearsay did it’s intended job.

That intended hit was to distract from the WH defense and distract from the hearings ASAP.
Bolton is no novice as there is no way he would release classified information.

. John Bolton and his lawyer Chuck Cooper submitted the book manuscript to the NSC for review, which is notoriously known for leaking, on the eve of the impeachment trial, and they’re now surprised about a cherry-picked leak? We are left with a politically-motivated, last-minute, cherry-picked leak from anonymous sources to the Trump-hating New York Times. And now the media attention is focused on the Democrat demands, in hopes of turning a handful of Republicans susceptible to these tactics to join the Democrats in a call for witnesses — which, of course, the House Democrats opposed during their impeachment inquiry.

It’s Kavanaugh all over again. And the NYT refused to return the Pulitzer Prize given to their reporters for doing the heavy lifting for the Dems and publishing/pushing the Russian-Trump collusion delusion from the SAME anonymous sources used in this latest Red Herring Bolton “bombshell”. One would think the NYT would return the Pulitzers after ending up with so much egg on the face after their reporting proved false. Fake. A fraud.

But, I guess I thunk wrong and gave the press too much credit for decency. I certainly do not give any of the NSC moles or whistleblower any credit or expectation of decency, not to mention the truth.

You've essentially described something that's just a political event rather than a bonafide trial/judgement for a crime. This jury, of course, has less common sense than the average 12 members of the public. The power of wishful thinking in the Blue Mob has gotten tiring over the last few years, you do have to wonder how their personal lives have changed in any way since Saint Obama was in office. Their ability to see faces in clouds is wondrous to behold.

One successful part of this high stakes game is that the notion is being advanced that a President should be removed from office for tying funding to personal political advantage. If that were the case, I'd strongly guess that no administration (or congressman) would have held office beyond it's first few weeks.

The practical answer is for full transparency combined with the ability of the public to handle seeing the sausage being made. Yes, the Clintons and Uncle Joe used political influence to make themselves rich. Yes, Trump is using his office to make that public via funding pressure. I think I can handle both of those ideas at once and if the actions weren't out and out illegal, solve it at the ballot box.

Instead, in a bid for power, the Blue Mob is willing to tear the country apart for decades. Generally, I'd say that the actions surrounding Nixon, Clinton, and now Trump have done far more harm than good, but as usual, the interests of a few outweigh those of the many.

As a recently invented concept, Representative Democracy's main selling point is not economic, not 'fairness', but that it deals with succession of rule. That is the single biggest sticking point in other large scale political systems. The Blue Mob wants to throw that away in a fit of pique.